Program versions, you look a mess!

Seriously, someone needs to fix program versioning systems. They drive me nuts sometimes. There are so many different schemes. Windows used to use a 2-sigfig number (Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1) then switched to years (Windows 95, 98, 98 SE (?), 2000) then silly names that blur the release dates (Windows ME, XP, XP SP1, XP SP2, Vista). Let's look at some other schemes in use. I have the following programs on my computer:

• Ad-Aware 6.181  -  (4 significant figures; not bad)


• Ad-Aware Referencefile SE1R50  -  (with each update, the last two digits change, that's all. Annoying.)


• AIM 5.9.3828  -  (Usually they announce changes in the first two digits. The last 4 digits are a build number. I don't mind this scheme.)


• Audacity 1.2.3  -  (Why do they need all those decimals???)


• Desktop Sidebar 1.05 Build 115  -  (Same as 1.05.115 I guess. I don't know why they feel the need to have such a long name.)


• DirectX 9.0c  -  (They went from like 6.0 → 6.1 → 7.0 → 8.0 → 9.0 → 9.0a → 9.0b → 9.0c . What's so wrong with using 9.1? Or 9.5?)


• Easy CD-DA Extractor 8.1.2.3  -  (Again with all the decimals seperating single digits; annoying.)


• Flash MX 2004 7.02  -  (So Flash went from 4.0 → 5.0 → MX → MX 2004 . What ever.)


• Google Desktop 4.2006.627.443  -  (This appears very long, but each piece plays a part. as a.b.c.d, a = Major Release; b = Year; c = Month and Day; d = Build Number. Still a little long: why a 4-digit year?)


• iPod Updater 6-28-2006  -  (This scheme is just the date; informative about release time but completely uninformative about how much of an update it is from the previous version.)


• Java 2 SDK 1.4.2-06  -  (Sure. decimals, hyphens. The more the merrier.)


• LAME 4.0 Alpha 10  -  (This is an Alpha build, meaning a very early release, probably filled with bugs.)


• LogonStudio RC6  -  (RC: Release Candidate is a relatively new term. It is released after the beta as a final bugfix before the final product is released, hopefully bugfree. RC6 is a bit much I think.)


• Picasa 2.2.0 Build 28.10  -  (Again Google with the long scheme. A decimal in the build number? I'm guessing the build number is dd.mm .)


• Prime 95 24.13  -  (Prime 95 just chugs out those +1 updates. Only program I know that's about 20.)


• Shoutcast DSP 1.8.2b  -  (So what's with the b? Again, stick to numbers.)


• SiSoft Sandra 2005 SR1  -  (Year and update, similar to Windows XP SP1.)


• Winamp 5.25 Build 787 Beta  -  (Unlike LAME, this doesn't have a Beta (or Alpha) number. The word Beta is simply there to signify that it is not a full release.)


• Windows Vista CTP2  -  (CTP: Community Technology Preview. This was released after the Betas. So it's like RC.)


• ZSNES 03/29 WIP  -  (WIP: Work In Progress; I think this is even pre-alpha.)

Needless to say, all of this nonsense is ridiculous. There are some good ideas in here, but there are some bad ones and silly ones, and ones that are need even ideas. I think it all needs to be standardized. I like the whole Alpha/Beta/RC bit. I like 2 or 3 sigfigs. I dunno. Think about it.